linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] mailbox/arm64/ qcom: rework compatibles for fallback

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 5 Aug 2023 14:21:22 +0200
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/11] mailbox/arm64/ qcom: rework compatibles for
 fallback

On 22.03.2023 18:41, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Changes since v2
> ================
> 1. Split fixes to separate patchset which is now dependency:
>    https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230322173559.809805-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/T/#t
> 2. Add Ack
> 3. No other changes, as discussion with Dmitry did not reach conclusion on incompatibility.
> 
> Changes since v1
> ================
> 1. Rebase
> 2. Make msm8994 fallback for several variants, not msm8953, because the latter
>    actually might take some clocks.
> 3. Two new patches for SDX55.
> 4. Minor corrections in bindings style.
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230202161856.385825-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/
> 
> Description
> ===========
> 
> If entire approach is accepted (and correct), there are no dependencies and
> patches can be picked independently.  Although the best in the same cycle, so
> there will be no new `dtbs_check` warnings.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Looks like this was only partially merged, resulting in schema warnings

Konrad